First, ask yourself: what would you do if a blatant liar aggressively required from you recognition of her scientific authority (whereas it's way far to be even necessary)? And what if she were supported by her patron?

CRG is «an international biomedical research institute of excellence»

CRG mission, vision and values:
«Integrity, ethics and social responsibility»

Oops! Really??

Dictation to process concocted data, coercion to talk only alone (that was felt very awkward) with someone allegedly responsible, but utterly incompetent, work without necessary collaboration, repeated threats, bullying, slandering, repeated lies, and dismissal at the end — was this all included in that «integrity», «ethics» and «social responsibility»?﻿

Luis Serrano Pubul: «I think what maria proposed does not make any sense»
A few months later the very same person fired the main addressee of this letter for refusal to recognize the same maria's scientific authority — interesting, isn't it?

On 06/07/16 18:39, Luis Serrano Pubul wrote:
> Dear Katerina
> Could we meet next week [...]?
> I think what maria proposed to connect directly to the MS raw data or sequencing data does not make any sense.

All right. Very true. But wait, what?

Luis Serrano Pubul: «You need to leave the lab if you do not talk with her alone»

On 15/11/16 10:26, Luis Serrano Pubul wrote:
> Katerina I can try to be there, but remember what we discussed if you cannot work with Maria and you cannot talk with her alone you need to leave the lab end of December. She is your boss for the project.
> Thanks
> Luis
>
> From: Katerina Kirsanоvа
> Sent: martes, 15 de noviembre de 2016 10:21 a.m.
> Cc: Luis Serrano Pubul
> Subject: Re:
>
> Dear Luis,
> I wouldn't like to discuss it with Maria tete-a-tete, please.
> I just need the doc file with specification on the formats.
>
> Cheers, -
> Catherine
> El 11/15/16 a las 07:45, Maria Lluch Senar escribió:
>> Hi Katerina
>> We can talk about MS files at 16,30. Is it ok for you?

Of course they perfectly knew that Katerina could talk alone with Maria.
But when you're threatened and coerced to talk alone with someone no matter what is going on and no matter whether your job requires work collaboration — this feels flat out wrong, at very least it makes you just sick. Moreover, if you're already absolutely certain: you cannot give them what they are eager to get from you — and that is not your job and professional skills.

K. was doomed anyway, Luis was playing here as by the time of this his email, several weeks before it, M Lluch-Senar already wrote K. that K. would be fired anyway:

On 28/09/16 14:23, Maria Lluch Senar wrote:
> I have talked with Luis and he said me that he has given you the opportunity to work for three months in the lab and to finish the project.
[NB: K. had 5 years contract signed by Luis Serrano on behalf of CRG, it turned out to be just a sheet of paper. No respect to a person whatsoever, neither to their own legislation]

Maria wrote that (with cc to CRG Director, i.e. Luis Serrano Pubul) the very next day after K. was told that Maria is her boss: the day before this email, on 27/09/16, Luis told K. in his office that for K. to save her job he gave her 3 months to get along 1) with Maria and 2) with the people in the lab — as at the same time K. was falsely accused that she can work with no one, — so if K. gets along with no one then K. is fired.
In reality both these two so nice «warrants» were put away almost immediately.
«There's no honor among thieves» (even «end of December» was a lie… — turned out the middle of December)
K. had no problems whatsoever with the folks in the lab, that was too obvious, but certainly did not matter: apparently Maria was already promised that after 3 months «the toy» would be discarded.

From Library of the European Parliament, «Conflicts of interest in public administration», 05/02/2013:

Chair of Women In Science/Gender Balance Committee at CRG,Isabelle Vernos is at the same time… — Director's (Luis Serrano's) wife & member of the ERC Scientific Council.

Hence the party looks even more languishing: there is a certain «indicator, a precursor and a result of» corruption.
But otherwise. What was that? Franco style (á la féminin) of management in science?
Hard to bring up other allusions…

K. made this schema (updated with last events) for Conflict Resolution Committee at CRG.

Later the CRG Administration dishonourably implied (see below) that this Committee was allegedly called to make her follow the discipline. But that was the other way around: the Committee was called for by K. to resolve the issues with Maria Lluch's professional misconduct and incompetence.

All fairly appropriate Committee's suggestions (transfer K. to another lab, Luis Serrano supervising project as its real leader) were rejected by Luis Serrano, who was forcing K. to recognize his favorite's (i.e. Maria Lluch's) scientific authority: that was his «non-negotiable requirement» (see below)

[click to enlarge]

Working ambiance at CRG, the research institution

K.: It's already more than a month when I've been doing almost nothing…M. Lluch-Senar [chuckles, to Luis Serrano]: Luis, Katerina wants to work!

A few weeks later Maria Lluch, being unable to set a proper task for several months before that, is announced as a boss for K..
The next day after that Maria Lluch writes to K. with cc to Luis Serrano that K. is going to be fired in 3 months (she was indeed fired in 2 months and a half).

«…this is not England or Europe, here there is no honor or ethics, just pure corruption» [a colleague]

Then ask yourself a fair question:
Why the hell the standardized files from the machine had to be concocted by Maria's hand before the analysis and processing into the DB?
Why she was so eager to make her own «new format» though being utterly illiterate in the subject of standardization and data formats for analysis/DB processing?

So when you seem to be involved into a quite probable scientific misconduct (the negligent data making up, actually sheer data manipulation!) by a person who repeatedly lies, spreads slander and intrigues behind someone's back —
think about that you may become a scapegoat at the end. Even if you only get stained — it's still the shame.
Yes, it is awkward to read…
But much more shameful thing is to be cowed by a person who made her move up to the position she holds by a very questionable way.
And to realize why this her way up is so questionable and shameful for a scientist: enough to see how she avoids open discussion and open exchange of the opinions. Enough to have it experienced — of how she's been craving to fuck K.'s brain claiming to be alone with herself.

When a person, who repeatedly stresses you out, disrupts your work and utterly unable to openly and constructively discuss the project with all involved parties — it's freaking disgusting when the very same person also claims to have you alone with herself: indeed just to fuck you (your brain actually but when your brain is violently fucked — it hurts unbearably).﻿

Above we can see the favorite Maria's trip up, used repeatedly in her emails to K.:«If you think that changing the pipeline to consider the new format is not possible please let us know and we will find the way to implement it».

She's been absolutely unable to perceive any explanations why her undoubtedly genius idea just would not work: her arrogance and ignorant obtrusion of the way how the data analysis (which is not her expertise at all) should be technically carried out just must be accepted with complete obedience no matter how feasible it is to perform at least partially.
As soon as you start bringing her technical reasoning, however best you try keeping patience etc — she gets aggressive almost immediately throwing at you here-above quoted her favourite trip up.

Literally: «I am the one with the scientific authority here — you only must listen and follow! You cannot follow my genius ideas? — Shut up! Fired!!»

Yet another money laundry case under the brand of so called MycoSynVac? generously funded by ERC (European Research Council).

K. presented the following to the Conflict Resolution Committee at CRG, she highlighted for them the most odd quotes.
They have not found them really abnormal. They rather silently agreed to be sneakily used for her dismissal. She have had a correspondence with Juan Valcarcel, genuinely presuming his independence, but no one from the Committee expressed any sorry to her after all.
Juan Valcarcel just told K. quietly and smiling that the dismissal would be illegal and K. could go to the court then. Nice kids, really.
You lose your job, never mind, this is just our game with us playing people.

Getting their (Maria Lluch's & Luis Serrano's) «no one can work with you», «you cannot work with users», «no one can understand what you are doing» and other bullshit like that, just as a way to oppress her, — every time K. heard that she just felt utterly stunned.
(NB: at the same time Maria was blocking any communications with other people in the lab and misleading K. with data sources)
It was told her repeatedly as a method of Maria's stunning intellectual argumentation in response to any technical reasoning too, further absolutely supported by Luis, except only a single one first time (see above) when apparently he dared to openly express his own opinion on the subject (genial Maria' ideas), yet appears that later he was strictly prohibited to be that assertive.
Hopefully he wasn't beaten for that and didn't suffer too much :-|
K. could not get it: how come that people who consider themselves as scientists happened to turn over rabid liars?
What about science they do? If they are lying that at ease…
K:

It should be done this way. Data are normally processed the way I suggest, at least to assure system consistency and data integrity.

Maria:

You have to obey me.
Doesn't matter that it won't work. Do what I said to do.
This is you who can work with no one.
If you cannot do my way we find someone else who will do what I say whatever shit I order to do.

— in italics it was said literally. Again and again.
The very same people have been repeatedly requiring to recognize their scientific authority. Franco style? Or what was that?

The most funny thing in the doc below is their «in turn» after the claim for recognition which they were utterly unable to get the decent way. You recognize someone's so shamefully unsatisfied scientific authority and direct supervision and… ta-dam! — «in turn» they allow you to do your job!
NB: scientific authority here is an exclusive right for Maria Lluch to fuck your brain being alone with you and then to lie about you whatever shit she invents — her patron Luis Serrano would support it by any means. You have to talk alone with her: this is what they repeatedly claimed, whereas having Maria's ambitions together with incompetence in the subject and aggression, there is no other word than «brainfucking» for what she was doing with you tet-à-tet.

Interestingly, «Relocation of Catherine's workplace outside of Serrano's group should be considered» was firstly suggested by the Committee, but then stroke out by those claiming for recognition of the «scientific authority»… Introduced again, but no: «recognize or perish!»﻿ — see p. 6 in first version of the Committee below, p. 5 was also rejected: no collaboration, shut up! No witnesses for what we'd force you to do!

Juan Valcarcel was contacted by K. in private: she asked him to save her from bullying and she called for Conflict Resolution Committee to protect her from M Lluch Senar's bullying as it was fully supported by CRG Director and looked as a mobbing. Instead J. Valcarcel actually had joined the party: K. was fired for refusal to accept «non-negotiable requirement from Luis, i.e. that Catherine must recognize the scientific authority of Maria» since the behaviour of the latter looked as a sheer research misconduct.James Sharpe (recently appointed Director of the EMBL's outstation in Barcelona) also joined to this mobbing, K. asked him for assistance as well, but on behalf of Luis Serrano he claimed the same from her: K. asked for protection, instead she was coerced to recognise scientific authority of the person she asked to protect her from! — nice, isn't it?
Still… it feels better to believe that at least James sincerely wanted to help.

The claim of this «scientific recognition» was at very least unnecessary (though ridiculous!) unless yet another sign of the Spanish(?) corruption which at no point K. could accept as appropriate to follow. It's worth to mention that to the meeting on this so called Conflict Resolution Committee, M Lluch Senar came along accompanied by her patron — «because she's his co-leader of the project» (Juan Valcarcel) — so much ridiculous again: rather her professional qualities and culture just could not guarantee the adequate reporting.

This is first (rejected) version of the here-above mentioned document:

— «absence of threats from all parts» is put quite sneaky, as K. never menaced anyone, that was other way round and she just asked for stopping to threaten her (though she had to recognize fascist-style authority of whoever had threatened her). But we can forgive this Juan Valcarcel as he's been benefiting from ERC grants á merci of Director's wife…

Luis Serrano, Coordinator of the Systems Biology Programme at the Centre for Genomic Regulation in Barcelona, Spain, and recipient of a €2 million ERC Advanced Investigator Grant for five years, said the requirement of keeping time sheets is at best a waste of time and worst an insult to the high-level researchers. “Time sheets do not make much sense, to be honest. If you want to cheat, you can always cheat,” he said. He said other grants he receives from the Spanish government and the Human Frontier Science Programme do not require time sheets [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2933871/]

— looks like here, Luis, there was that sure case when you were not cheating… and you were right about yourself: secured by your position, if you want to cheat, you can always cheat.

See here who actually has called for the Committee. Then see how they put it in their dismissal notice below. So mean. And such a shame for the prominent lecturer on ethic subjects in science.

First his «co-leader» of the project excludes you from any work collaboration, then slanders that you «can work with no one» and then he completely supports that slander — so nice, isn't it? ﻿

But indeed it was just a part of their freak show:

«A non-negotiable requirement from Luis, i.e. that Catherine must recognize the scientific authority of Maria as co-leader of the project and work under her direct supervision, remains unacceptable for Catherine. Therefore the Conflict Resolution Committee has been unable to find a common ground for understanding between the parts on this key issue and regretfully concludes that a conciliation process is not possible under the current conditions» (email from the Committee of 13/12/16 10:40)

And of course this, along with the fact who actually called for the Committee was not quoted in their dismissal notice. They dishonourably used this Committee just to make it part of the concocted evidence of insubordination.

Please discuss the format in open and constructive manner.
As there is a strict standardization and DB processing rule «Excel is forbidden» (see: here was a pic forwarded later, see below)
the format should be a reasonable amounts of tab-separated text files uploaded one-by-one.
Each of this text files should not exceed 10Mb to be uploaded and processed in a reasonable time.
Each column of each file should be described in detail.
File names should have meaning and described in details otherwise text field in the upload interface should be filled in.

Current processing and analysis is done for 2-spreadsheet Excel files (no more than 10Mb of size) as a trade-off for accurate format description (done by Luis) of a standard files of results coming from a proteomics experiment and my good will to make all my best for the lab.

Processing of Excel files into the DB with analysis on the fly is not a common practice and generally is not accepted due to obstruct capacity to support the standards and analysis as consistent and reasonable prompt.
So CSV only (XML/JSON for those biologists who want die hard is an option too).

However, once the standard is created and described the way it was done by Luis and with the participation/by a professional IT specialist it is still possible to make sure that service is scalable and reliable.

Thanks, —
Catherine

— this is the referenced pic of the outstanding cruelty (actually called the extreme despair), and K. was summoned to the Administrative Director office then, and then of course K. apologized to the only one affected poor kid…

Conflict Resolution Committee of the CRG was called by Katerina, not by Maria Lluch & Luis Serrano, as they so basely imply it in their dismissal notice (see below).

Also in this document they have actually just repeated their slander — see as well in the time line schema: «no one can work with you, you have bad communication with everyone» — this was said to Katerina in September as their reply on her question: why they wanted her to move in the lab if they asserted that she was so bad as a person?
They asserted this shit («no one can work with you») after she had agreed to move in the lab in July: she was told then that they wanted her to move because they needed for her expertise. Would you agree to move in the lab when you're told that you can work with no one?
The last trip up was especially nice from them whereas initially M Lluch-Senar had excluded Katerina from any communications with data providers even though it was an utter requirement for the tasks which Katerina had to perform. So she was working alone and had to figure on her own what were the data sources, and, surely, everything was fine with the other colleagues, no communication problems, just normal lab folks, who have been just helpful and nice. Otherwise, without them, the project could not move at all. But it has moved, please see its timeline: at no point that progress owed to Maria Lluch's activity, which was appallingly destructive.

Also in CRG's dismissal notice they have lied explaining the reason for the dismissal as if it was a repeated insubordination to Maria Lluch, i.e. to the favorite of Luis Serrano, CRG Director. She was not even an official boss of K., she was only set up as such after already having been set up as a project co-leader (exclusively by the authority of her patron). Yet right before Luis Serrano has appointed M Lluch Senar to be a boss for K. (with no documents, no signatures of course), Maria Lluch slandered K. that K. can work with no one.
And immediately after announcing her slander M Lluch Senar wrote to K. that the latter would be fired anyway. Nice, isn't it?

The truth is that firstly it was repeated harassment, slander and repeated lies.﻿
Maria Lluch's misconduct and incompetence, imposed as her «scientific authority» and unaccepted by K. (and the acceptance of that was not her duty at all), K's refusal to give in to data manipulation had that cost: the dismissal.

— it turned out they were too shy to speak English in this disgraceful act, K. had got it only in Spanish.
However later CRG, Barcelona gave a care to translate their threats in English (international scientific institution of excellence) — it seems for them it was really important that K. would have gotten those threats.

I am sorry, I cannot comment on this.
I expect you respect your colleagues and able to communicate in a calm and professional manner by email and in person.

I see you do not understand the standardization subject and I am very able to prove it to a professional commission if its needed.
I also clearly see that you are getting passively aggressive and disrespectful, you are trying to undermine me on my professional field which is ridiculous and unacceptable. I think you have to apologize.

So I am sorry, I have nothing to ask you in person.

Regards, —
Catherine

— this was K.'s reply to M Lluch-Senar's email quoted here-above (the one with the red font).﻿

(signatures, K.'s & of Bruna Vives Prat, CRG managing director, are dimmed)
So the actual reason for the dismissal: you «must recognize the scientific authority of Maria as co-leader of the project and work under her direct supervision alone» otherwise you are fired. No one else should witness their research misconduct and data manipulation. Let alone senseless orders to reformat files just to keep you busy («new formatting did not matter, your 1st version was absolutely fine» — a colleague commented while working with that file).
This is how these cool scientists spend public money and do science now days.

Intellectual reasoning? Logical reasoning? Whatever fair damn reasoning?
Come on, bow and scrape and thank Universe, that these so great scientists could not call for the authorized science gestapo to help them out: they have only fired you because you had dared to question the authority of a really cool scientist whose favourite trip up in reply on any reasoning on the subject was just: «If you cannot do this work let us know and we will look for another way to do that».
Which was exceptionally ridiculous for this really cool scientist because «them» had no clue whatsoever about any way how their data could be processed in particular and how the scientific data are usually processed into the DB as that was not their expertise whatsoever.
But surely «they» had authority to impose on you any by-products from «their» so beautiful minds.
Because. You. Cannot. Period.
— intellect, culture, work ethic here are so blatantly demonstrated that you just lose the gift of speech…

Why the data analyst has been coerced to work with concocted data and had been denied the direct contact with the data producers?
Why that so damn bright scientist who, as we're sure, is Maria Lluch, — why she was so eager to interfere between the data and a data analyst, why the hell she had to concoct that shameful hand made copy-paste Excel spreadsheets (tens megabytes), which she was unable/unwilling to put in a group repository and thus sent it by email, instead of allowing the professional to work with the data sources directly?MS data were already processed into the DB according to the format, suggested by the project leader, Luis Serrano, Director of CRG — why this very format was refuted by his favourite and why Luis Serrano, Director of CRG had to obey M Lluch-Senar and why did he let her manipulate with data?
Why on the Earth she's been so craving for that bow and scrape?How the hell do they spend public money then? — they hire a professional, then perform their mobbing actions against her attacking her purely on personal ground, gaslighting and slandering about her relations with other colleagues with nonsense allegations (because there is no other way to attack her) for several months and at the end just fire her after more than 9 months without giving her any credit for the job she's been doing for them.
Is it a Franquist style of modernized Spanish science or what??

And at the and — why the Staff Scientist Maria Lluch Senar and the CRG Director Luis Serrano Pubul had to lie so shamelessly?

These are fairly good questions.

And finally, how come the path of the apparent scientific misconduct was the easiest choice for them?…

Here is my twitter account: @JWapatoo where I post current updates on this case and my relaxed attitude,
i.e. after me being put under pressure and stress, it is naturally personalized unlike expressed as such
while I am on duty where I'm restrained by professional standing rules and contract clauses.

So these people don't even give a damn about the fact that a professional engineer, doing brainwork, can be only either productive or stressed.
Never both. Obviously, if quality results are to be provided.
Or, there is no need for data integrity in all this so playful scientific ambiance?

Or, these scientists — do they use their own brain for professional purposes?

P.S.
CRG, represented by its Director Luis Serrano and PI Juan Valcarcel, does support scientific fraud of their PI MP Cosma — please see by these links an article of Leonid Schneider and PubPeer comments.